Debates about Regionalism Flashcards
why is regionalism controversial?
regionalism is controversial due to its impact on sovereignty and democracy
by cooperating or pooling sovereignty, states will not be able to control all aspects of the negotiations and will have to make compromises
however, that is the nature of all negotiations, whether taken on a regional level or not
examples of the impact of regionalism on state sovereignty
adopting a regional approach to controlling globalisation has a profound and visible impact on states’ sovereignty and the ability of the people to make their own democratic laws…
for example, the Court of Justice of the European Union has made significant rulings on workers’ rights
the Court has ruled that temporary and agency workers are entitled to the same holiday rights as full-time permanent workers, which applies to all workers in all countries of the EU
what is one of the arguments for the UK leaving the EU?
one of the arguments for the UK leaving the EU was that it would be free to set its own laws concerning workers and the environment
there is undoubtedly an argument that there is a ‘democratic deficit’ at the heart of the EU, and this is what concerns citizens who expect a democratic say in the way their country is governed rather than having rules imposed on them from above
how is democracy impacted by regionalism?
arguably, democracy is undermined by supranational or intergovernmental (interaction among states based on sovereign independence) bodies
these bodies make binding decisions beyond the reach of the people which lack accountability, sovereignty and self-determination are therefore undermined
EXAMPLE: The EU
the EU has been criticised for the freedom of movement it allows – EU citizens are free to live and work in other states, which has led to significant numbers of people emigrating around Europe
for example, about 750,000 Polish people have moved to the UK in recent years
however, the voting public has no ability to limit these numbers while their country is a member of the EU, which was undoubtedly one of the main reasons why UK citizens voted to leave the EU in 2016
EXAMPLE = NAFTA
similarly, in the USA, NAFTA has been perceived as leading to the outsourcing of jobs to Mexico, resulting in industry closures and job losses in the US
in this atmosphere, immigrants are often blamed for taking what jobs there are or undercutting wages of ‘local’ people
people who have lost their jobs or feel alienated by the pace of change in a globalised era may blame regional organisations for exacerbating and deepening the process and causing changes beyond their control
controversies and debates about regionalism
impact on state sovereignty
impact on democracy
benefit big corporations and TNCs
what is the argument behind regionalism favouring big corporations and TNCs?
regional organisations and globalisation are also seen to benefit ‘big corporations’ and transnational corporations (TNCs) such as Coca Cola, GlaxoSmithKline and Unilever, rather than ordinary people
as trade increases and is seen to benefit TNCs over local or national producers, critics argue that consumers are all purchasing the same goods, services and culture
what do big corporations do?
big corporations with more competitive clout are pushing out smaller companies, leading to cultural homogenisation (the coming together of global cultures and development of a single, homogenous culture without diversity or dissent, also known as a monoculture)
what does regionalism favouring big corporations mean that states cannot do?
states cannot protect their own industries or producers because the terms of economic regional organisations tend to limit their ability to do this
since regionalism favours big corporations, who does this benefit the most?
some argue that this process benefits the USA most, as the USA controls much of the culture industry and many globally known products, such as Coca-Cola and McDonalds
a prime example is the Hollywood film industry, which can produce many popular, merchandisable films in English, which other countries cannot compete against
what is the counter argument behind regionalism supposedly favouring big corporations and therefore the USA? how might the link between regionalism and gloablisation be a good thing?
however, non-US producers also have access to the US market and can sell their goods and services to Americans
for example, German and Japanese car industries have been very successful at exporting and selling Mercedes, BMWs, Toyotas and Nissans, which has cost many jobs in the US car industry
moreover, though there are losers in terms of jobs and industries, most people benefit from globalisation through more choice, cheaper prices and better-quality goods, while protecting industries usually leads to less choice and higher prices
is regionalism a way of controlling the impact of globalisation rather than exacerbating it?
the EU among others would argue that regional organisations are a way of controlling and limiting the impact of globalisation
globalisation is a powerful force that can affect the sovereignty of states, but co-operation and pooling sovereignty is an effective way for countries to fight back and resist losing power and influence
how does regionalism give states more influence rather than taking it away?
regional organisations give all states, big or small, the ability to control or shape the world they exist in
for example, environmental issues do not respect borders, climate change affects every state, sea and river pollution affects all countries, and air pollution does not stop at boundaries
so states have come together to try to halt the effects of climate change through the International Panel on Climate Change
they are co-operating to limit the impact of environmental change which they would not be able to do alone, thus increasing their influence
how does regionalism allow states to limit the power of TNCs? why is it important to do so?
(could be linked to regionalism giving states more control rather than taking it away, does not limit their sovereignty, actually increases it)
on a regional level, states have also come together to limit the power of TNCs and their economic mobility
this is important as some TNCs have more wealth than sovereign countries, which makes TNCs potentially very powerful
for example, Apple has $200 billion in cash reserves, slightly less than the GDP of the entire Republic of Ireland, a country of about four and a half million people
and in 2012, Samsung had $196 billion of revenue, more than the GDP of Morocco, with 32 million citizens
